WASHINGTON — In an unprecedented escalation of his long-standing feud with the Federal Reserve, President Donald Trump on Monday announced the immediate removal of Governor Lisa Cook from the central bank’s board, citing allegations of mortgage fraud stemming from a criminal referral by a key ally. Cook, the first Black woman to serve as a Fed governor, swiftly rebuffed the action, declaring that Trump lacks the legal authority to fire her and pledging to continue her duties while challenging the decision in court.
The move marks the first time in the Federal Reserve’s 112-year history that a sitting president has attempted to oust a governor, potentially testing the boundaries of executive power over the independent institution responsible for setting U.S. monetary policy. Legal experts warn it could ignite a protracted court battle, possibly reaching the Supreme Court, and raise questions about the Fed’s autonomy at a time when economic pressures are mounting.
In a scathing letter posted on Truth Social and addressed to Cook, Trump invoked the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, which allows removal “for cause.” He pointed to a August 15, 2025, criminal referral from William J. Pulte, director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) and a vocal Trump supporter, to Attorney General Pamela Bondi. The referral accuses Cook of falsifying documents to secure favorable loan terms by claiming two separate properties—one in Michigan and another in Georgia—as her primary residence within a two-week span in 2021.
“As detailed in the Criminal Referral, you signed one document attesting that a property in Michigan would be your primary residence for the next year,” Trump wrote. “Two weeks later, you signed another document for a property in Georgia stating that it would be your primary residence for the next year. It is inconceivable that you were not aware of your first commitment when making the second. It is impossible that you intended to honor both.”
Trump emphasized the Fed’s “tremendous responsibility” in setting interest rates and regulating banks, arguing that Cook’s alleged “deceitful and potentially criminal conduct in a financial matter” undermines public confidence in her integrity. “At a minimum, the conduct at issue exhibits the sort of gross negligence in financial transactions that calls into question your competence and trustworthiness as a financial regulator,” he added, ordering her removal effective immediately.
Cook, appointed by President Joe Biden in 2022 and confirmed by the Senate in a 51-47 party-line vote in September 2023, has not been charged with any crime. The Department of Justice (DOJ) confirmed last week it is investigating the allegations, which Pulte backed with photographs of signed documents. In a statement Monday, Cook vowed defiance: “President Trump purported to fire me ‘for cause’ when no cause exists under the law, and he has no authority to do so. I will not resign. I will continue to carry out my duties to help the American economy as I have been doing since 2022.”
She has retained high-profile attorney Abbe Lowell, known for representing figures like Hunter Biden and Jared Kushner. Lowell blasted the action as a “reflex to bully” lacking “any proper process, basis or legal authority,” promising to pursue all necessary steps to block it. “We will take whatever actions are needed to prevent his attempted illegal action,” he said.
The Federal Reserve declined immediate comment on the letter, though a spokesperson noted the board’s next policy meeting is scheduled for September 16-17. Cook’s term was set to run through 2038, designed to insulate governors from political whims under the Fed’s structure.
Legal and Historical Precedent
The Federal Reserve Act specifies that governors can be removed “for cause,” a term historically interpreted as malfeasance, misconduct, or dereliction of duty—not policy disputes. No president has ever tested this provision against a sitting governor. Legal scholars, including Peter Conti-Brown of the University of Pennsylvania, argue the allegations may not qualify, as the mortgage transactions occurred in 2021 when Cook was an academic, predating her Fed role. They were part of public records vetted during her Senate confirmation.
“These officials have been vetted by our President and our Senate,” Conti-Brown said. “The idea that you can then reach back and say all these things that happened before now constitute fireable offenses is incongruous with the entire concept of ‘for cause’ removal.”
If challenged, the case could delve into executive authority under Article II of the Constitution, the Fed’s quasi-private status, and whether pre-appointment actions constitute “cause.” Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren, ranking member of the Senate Banking Committee, condemned it as an “illegal attempt” and “authoritarian power grab” that “must be overturned in court,” framing it as a scapegoating tactic amid Trump’s economic frustrations.
Pulte, a staunch Trump critic of the Fed, praised the move on X, thanking the president’s “commitment to stopping mortgage fraud and following the law.”
Economic Context and Trump’s Fed Pressure
The firing comes amid Trump’s relentless campaign for lower interest rates to stimulate growth and ease the burden of the $37 trillion national debt. Since returning to office in January 2025, Trump has lambasted Fed Chair Jerome Powell—whom he appointed in 2017—for resisting cuts, citing uncertainties from tariffs and other policies. Last week, Powell hinted at potential rate reductions if conditions warrant, but emphasized proceeding “carefully.”
Trump backed off earlier threats to fire Powell, whose term ends in May 2026, but has targeted Biden appointees. Cook’s ouster follows Adriana Kugler’s early resignation this month, creating a vacancy Trump filled by nominating Stephen Miran, his Council of Economic Advisers chair. Two current governors, Christopher Waller and Michelle Bowman, are Trump holdovers.
If Cook’s removal holds and her replacement is confirmed, Trump could secure a 4-3 majority on the seven-member board, influencing the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC), which sets key rates. The board alone controls rates like interest on bank reserves. Analysts warn this could erode the Fed’s independence, a cornerstone of stable monetary policy since the 1970s. Research shows independent central banks better manage inflation, and any perceived politicization might fuel volatility.
Edward Mills of Raymond James called it an “unprecedented moment for central bank independence,” signaling the White House’s push for influence. “Markets are likely to view this attack on Fed independence negatively, amplifying uncertainty over future policy direction,” he said.
Tim Duy of SGH Macro Advisors added: “It speaks to the determination of this administration to remake the Federal Reserve… It’s another reason to believe that rates will be lower than would otherwise be the case.”
The allegations against Cook also align with broader Trump administration efforts to dismantle diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives, leading to departures of prominent women and minorities in government. Similar mortgage fraud claims have been leveled at political opponents like Sen. Adam Schiff.
Market Reactions and Broader Implications
Financial markets reacted swiftly to the news, reflecting heightened uncertainty. The ICE U.S. Dollar Index dropped 0.3% overnight, signaling potential weakening amid policy instability. The 2-year Treasury yield, highly sensitive to Fed expectations, fell 4 basis points to around 3.85%, suggesting bets on nearer-term rate cuts. Longer-term 10-year yields rose, steepening the yield curve and indicating inflation concerns if Fed independence wanes.
Stock futures extended losses in overnight trading, with the S&P 500 e-minis down 0.2% post-announcement. Gold futures climbed 0.3% to $2,550 per ounce, as investors sought safe havens amid geopolitical and economic risks.
Analysts predict short-term volatility, with potential for deeper impacts if litigation drags on. A successful removal could embolden further interventions, risking higher inflation or eroded investor confidence in U.S. assets. Conversely, a court reversal might reinforce Fed autonomy but intensify political tensions.
As the DOJ probe unfolds and legal challenges mount, the episode underscores the fragile balance between executive oversight and central bank independence—a dynamic that could shape U.S. economic policy for years to come.